House Bill 99, titled the Reflexologists Right to Work Act, would amend North Carolina law to exempt certain certified reflexologists from oversight by the North Carolina Board of Massage and Body Work Therapy. The bill adds a new exemption to the statute governing activities that do not require a massage and body work therapy license, allowing a nationally certified reflexologist with current certification from the American Reflexology Certification Board (ARCB), or a student working under the supervision of an ARCB-certified reflexologist, to practice without being subject to that board’s licensing framework.
The exemption is limited in scope. It applies only to reflexologists who hold current ARCB certification, and to students only if they complete certification within 12 months of starting the certification process. The bill also defines reflexology for purposes of the exemption and states that the act becomes effective October 1, 2025.
HB99 would narrow the reach of North Carolina’s massage and body work therapy regulatory scheme by carving out a specific category of reflexology practice from board oversight. In practical terms, it would reduce licensing and regulatory burdens for ARCB-certified reflexologists and certain trainees, while leaving the broader licensing structure intact for other massage and body work practitioners. The bill would amend G.S. 90-624, which lists activities that do not require a license, and would therefore affect the authority of the North Carolina Board of Massage and Body Work Therapy over reflexology specifically.
Based on the bill text and available legislative context, the measure appears to be framed as a professional exemption and right-to-work style regulatory relief bill rather than a controversial policy overhaul. There are no recorded votes or committee transcripts in the provided materials, so there is no direct evidence of floor debate or organized support/opposition. The referral to the Health Committee and then Regulatory Reform suggests it is being treated as a professional regulation issue.
The main point of potential contention is whether reflexology should remain under the oversight of the massage and body work therapy board or be treated as a distinct practice with its own certification standard. Supporters are likely to favor reduced regulation for certified practitioners and students, while critics may question whether the exemption could weaken consumer protections or create confusion about the boundary between reflexology and massage therapy. Another possible issue is the bill’s reliance on ARCB certification, which could be seen as favoring one credentialing body over others.